HomeMy WebLinkAboutLEMAY AVENUE ESTATES - PDP - 37-04 - CORRESPONDENCE - REVISIONSResponse: The revised and additional ramp locations have been added to the plans per the
redlines from Transportation Planning.
Number: 52 Created: 11 /9/2004
[11/9/04] Perhaps the applicant is already aware, but this project will need to connect to (or
at least provide the funds to facilitate a connection) to the trail that is planned to run adjacent
to Stanton Creek. It looks like this was accounted for in the design (between lots 22 and
23), but is not specifically called out as such. A 6 foot concrete path at minimum will be
necessary. Please coordinate with Parks staff (Craig Foreman) on the particulars of how
this will tie into the trail and the logistics of funding and construction. Will probably also have
to move the location of the storm sewer in this location slightly so that everything can fit in
there. If it's problematic at this location, I could see a connection working between lots 17
and 18.
RESPONSE: The plan has been revised to show a proposed trail connection to the north
property line for a future trail connection. The lots utilities and grading in this area have
been revised to accommodate this future trail connection.
Number: 54 Created: 11/9/2004
[11/9/04] What exactly are the limits (north and south) of the proposed improvements
(specifically road widening, the addition of turn lanes and bike lanes) to Lemay Ave?
Response: One half of South Lemay Avenue will be widened to 4-1ane arterial standards
within the boundary of this property. The proposed construction will match the existing
Lemay Avenue section north of this property. A taper to match existing pavement will be
constructed approximately 1,200 linear feet south of the south property line. Preliminary
interim and ultimate designs of Lemay Avenue are included for review.
Department: Zoning Issue Contact: Jenny Nuckols
Topic: ZONING
Number: 5 Created: 10/29/2004
[10/29/04] Lot 13 is under half an acre. The LIE zone requires that all lots be at least one
half acre in size.
Response: Lot 13 has been revised to comply.
Number: 6 Created: 10/29/2004
[10/29/04] There is a street in Fort Collins named Rawahs Way - it is very close to the
proposed street of Rawah Lane and may cause confusion to emergency services.
Response: Rawah Drive has been revised to Mountain Home Drive.
Page 15
Response: Tract D has now been provided 3 separate direct access locations from what will
be dedicated streets within the subdivision.
Topic: Storm Sewers on Private Lots
Number: 65 Created: 11 /12/2004
[11/12/04] Some plans show storm sewers being designed to be on private lots. All
proposed storm sewers should be kept in Tracts that are not part of the lots which would
allow maintenance of these sewers to be done without encroaching onto private property.
Response: All storm sewers should now be contained within tracts.
Topic: Subdrain System
Number: 59 Created: 11 /9/2004
[11/9/04] Please show the subdrain system on the utility plans. Show how this system will
be tied to the stormwater system. Outfall should be designed to be at or above the 100 year
water surface elevation in the storm sewer system.
Response The subdrain system if necessary, will be added on the final engineering
drawings.
Topic: Utility Plans
Number: 61 Created: 11 /12/2004
[11/12/04] At final a detailed erosion control plan is required as well as storm sewer pipe
profiles and all relevant water quality details.
Response: Acknowledged.
Department: Traffic Operations Issue Contact: Eric Bracke
Topic: Traffic
Number: 1 Created: 10/25/2004
[10/25/04] 1 have reviewed the TIS for the project and found it to be acceptable. I do not
however, agree with all of the conclusions in the report. In fact, APF is going to apply to the
intersection of Carpenter/Lemay. The report states that the impact of the project is
negligible to the intersection of Carpenter/Lemay. The intersection will be at LOS F and the
project increases delay by 6.5%. The LUC states that if the impact is greater than 2%, then
the project impact is considered significant. Improvements will need to be made to the
intersection. Lemay is an arterial roadway and improvements such as auxiliary lanes should
be incorporated into the project.
Response This comment has been addressed in a separate meeting between Eric Bracke
and Eugene Copolla.
Department: Transportation Planning Issue Contact: David Averill
Topic: Transportation
Number: 51 Created: 11 /9/2004
[11/9/04] There are a number of crossing ramp locations that need to some work. Some
have problematic locations. Others have no "receiving ramp", and therefore create an
incomplete crossing. Please see redlines on utility plans (sheets 1-11-1-14).
Page 14
Topic: Grading
Number: 57 Created: 11 /9/2004
[11/9/04] When providing the final grading plans for the site please keep in mind that the
City does not allow rear yard drainage swales that go across 3 lots or more. These are
typically present maintenance problems for future homeowners. This appears to be the
case for several lots along the south property line and in the central part of the proposed
development.
Response: A detention and water quality pond has been added in the southeast corner of
the site to address this issue. Water from the rear portion of the lots along the southern
boundary will be captured in a Swale and deposited into this detention and water quality
pond.
Grading to the north will need to match existing grades at the Stanton Creek Subdivision.
Currently the grading does not extend beyond the limits of this property and it is impossible
to judge how the lots along the north end will tie to existing grades.
Response: The existing topography for the Stanton Creek suodivision has been added to
the drawings. The proposed grading as it is depicted on the grading plan will tie into existing
grades within this property.
Topic: Headcut
Number: 56 Created: 11 /9/2004
[11/9/04] The mater plan calls for drop structures to built to stabilize the existing headcut
on Stanton Creek to the east of this project. Access for this future work will be needed.
Alternatively the City might go ahead and build the drop structures called for by the master
plan at the time of construction of this development. This can be either done as a developer
repay or by a separate contractor hired by the City.
Response This issue has been discussed with Stormwater, and the latest engineering
plans address this issue.
Topic: Inlet on Lemay Avenue
Number: 60 Created: 11 /9/2004
[11/9/04] The plans currently show a storm sewer pipe collecting flows off of Lemay Avenue
discharging into the rear of proposed lots along the southern boundary. Please note that
this arrangement is not allowed, public systems are not allowed to discharge onto private
property. The pipe will need to be extended to a public outfall or the site's detention pond.
Response: A detention and water quality pond has been added in the southwest corner of
the site to address this issue This pond will detain street flows to an appropriate level, as
well as address water quality for the street drainage. This pond will discharge into the
existing roadside ditch along the east side of Lemay Avenue.
Topic: Plat
Number: 64 Created: 11 /12/2004
[11/12/04] The plat indicates that the floodplain area is all enclosed within proposed Tract
D. The City would be willing to take ownership and maintenance responsibility for the area
within the floodplain if provided with maintenance access to a tract that is strictly limited to
the area enclosed within the floodplain. The City will need permanent maintenance access
into the floodplain area and the erosion buffer area.
Page 13
detention pond will then discharge into the existing roadside ditch along the east side of
Lemay Avenue.
Topic: Floodplain Issues
Number: 55 Created: 11 /9/2004
[11/9/04] Floodplain Comments
1. Please see the included floodplain checklists for items required for 50% and 100%
submittals.
2. The plat must show the floodplain/floodway boundary. The floodplain and floodway
boundaries are the same along Stanton Creek.
3. Please show the floodplain cross -sections and BFE's on the drainage and grading
plans.
4. The erosion buffer zone needs to be shown on the site plan, drainage plan and grading
plans. The erosion buffer zone is different than the natural resources buffer.
5. All development must be outside of the erosion buffer zone (except the required
stormwater outfall). Please review plans for development that is currently shown within
the erosion buffer zone. In particular, look at lots 12,15, 16 and the detention pond.
6. Please see checklists for other restrictions on buffer zones including no construction
traffic, storage of materials, fill, irrigated vegetation, etc. Please include notes on the
plans about these items
7. The stormwater outfall must be constructed so as to minimize disturbance to the
channel bed and banks and also no fill is allowed in the floodway.
& Any construction in the floodplain/floodway outside of the erosion buffer zone must be
shown by a hydraulic analysis to cause no -rise. To avoid hydraulic modeling, all
development must stay out of the floodplain/floodway.
9. The erosion buffer zone and floodway must be staked in the field and marked as a no
disturbance area except for permitted items in the buffer and floodplain (i.e. stormwater
outfall).
10. A floodplain use permit and $25 fee are required for the stormwater outfall into Stanton
Creek. Please include a detail of how disturbance to the channel bed and banks will
be minimized.
11. Please see checklists for items relating to floodplains that must be included in the
drainage report.
Response: All proposed development within the erosion control buffer and floodplain of
Stanton Creek has been removed from the plan set so that there is now no construction
planned within either of these areas with the exception of two storm sewer outfalls. The
removal of this construction within the floodplain and erosion buffer should satisfy the above
requirements.
Page 12
Department: PFA Issue Contact: Michael Chavez
Topic: General
Number: 46 Created: 11 /8/2004
[11/8/04] PREMISES IDENTIFICATION: Approved numerals or addresses shall be provided
for all new and existing building in such a position as to be plainly visible and legible from
the street or road fronting the property. 1997 UFC 901.4.4
Response: Acknowledged.
Number: 47 Created: 11 /8/2004
[11/8/04] STREET NAMES:
Street names shall be verified and reviewed by County / City Planning Dept. prior to being
put in service. 1997 UFC 901.4.5
Response: Acknowledged.
Number: 48 Created: 11 /8/2004
[11/8/04] WATER SUPPLY: Residential (Within GMA)
No Residential building can be greater then 400 feet from a fire hydrant.
Fire hydrants are required with a maximum spacing of 800 feet along an approved roadway.
Each hydrant must be capable of delivering 1000 gallons of water per minute at a residual
pressure of 20 psi. 1997 UFC 901.2.2.2
Response Spacing for the hydrants shown in the drawings has been checked, and it
appears that the spacing as shown is adequate, based on the above criteria.
Department: Police
Topic: Police
Number: 58
[11/9/04] No Comments
Response: Acknowledged.
Issue Contact: Joseph Gerdom
Created: 11 /9/2004
Department: Stormwater Utility Issue Contact: Basil Hamdan
Topic: Detention Release Rate
Number: 62 Created: 11 /12/2004
[11/12/04) The report calculates a release rate of 2.99 cfs/acre was assumed for basin EX-
1, this seems a bit high, your actual calculations shows this rate to be closer to 0.299
cfs/Acre, please correct.
Response The release rate has been adjusted to 0.299 cfs/acre in the drainage report.
Topic: Drainage Plan
Number: 63 Created: 11 /12/2004
[11/12/04] Please show the off -site contributing drainage basin F1 on the plan. Explain how
the flows from that basin will be passed through this site to Fossil Creek, may need to
provide easement along the side lot lines of the northern lots to pass flows through.
Response There is no off -site basin labeled F-1 on the drainage plan. There is a basin G3
along Lemay Avenue that is being captured via an on -grade inlet This inlet will discharge
into a detention and water quality pond at the southwest corner of the property. This
Page 11
[11/5/04] A letter of intent also appears needed for the owner of the "Stanton Creek
Easement".
Response: The Stanton Creek Easement is shown on the Greenstone P.U.D. phase 2 plat
Reception number 93052714 recorded 7/29/1993. We have questions about the easement
regarding its validity because of the language on the plat and the lack of any formal
dedication provisions. It's not clear who it is actually dedicated to but The City of Fort
Collins appears to be the grantor. However, the Lemay Avenue Estates plat has taken
precautions to insure that no lots are encroaching into this easement and we have placed all
property within the easement into Tract D. These Tracts will be owned and managed by
either the City of Ft. Collins as part of the Stanton Creek floodplain or the Lemay Avenue
Estates HOA as part of their common area lands. Please refer to the site plan to identify the
easement."
Topic: Soils Report
Number: 14 Created: 11 /5/2004
[11/5/04] The soils report will need to address whether street drain systems are
recommended as was done in the Stanton Creek subdivision directly north. The general
area has high swelling soils and fly ash was used with the recent work on Lemay Avenue.
Response The necessity of a subdrain system as well as any necessary subgrade
modifications will be addressed at the time of final engineering.
Topic: Subdivision Plat
Number: 39 Created: 11 /5/2004
[11/5/04] Indicate who is to own and maintain the tracts within the development.
Response: Indicated on Tract Designation block on Sht. 1 of 2 of the plat
Department: Light & Power Issue Contact: Doug Martine
Topic: Landscape Plan
Number: 3 Created: 10/26/2004
[10/26/04] A landscape plan showing planned streetlights was sent via inter -office mail to
Steve Olt on 10-26-04. These lights need to be shown on the landscape plan and street
tree locations adjusted to provide 40 ft. minimum clearance between the trees and lights (15
ft. if the tree is an ornamental).
RESPONSE: Street lights as shown on the Light and Power Department redlines have
been added to the Site and Landscape Plans. The landscape plans have been revised to
remove street trees from within the required 40' clearance requirement and ornamental
trees from within the 15' clearance requirement.
Topic: Utility Plan
Number: 2 Created: 10/26/2004
[10/26/041 The locations of water & sewer services to each lot are not shown. If either of
these are to be at or near the side property line, they need to be coordinated with Light &
Power before any utility installation.
Response: Acknowledged
Page 10
Number: 20 Created: 11 /5/2004
(11/5/04] The utility companies will all need to allow the fencing, columns, and planters
which are proposed within the utility easement along Lemay Avenue.
Response: The utility companies will be notified and any use of the utility and drainage
easements will be properly addressed prior to construction. If additional space is required
we can accommodate.
Number: 21 Created: 11 /5/2004
[11/5/04] The utility easement on Lemay Avenue is required to be 15' not 9' as Lemay
Avenue is classified as an arterial street.
Response: The easement has been widened to 15 feet as requested.
Number: 22 Created: 11 /5/2004
[11/5/04] The soils report mentions a perimeter drain system. Will an actual subdrain
system be proposed by the development? A groundwater report may be required.
Response: The necessity of a subdrain system will be addressed at the time of final
engineering.
Number: 23 Created: 11 /5/2004
[11/5/04] Please show the standard access ramps along Lemay Avenue across Rawah
Drive.
Response The ramps across Rawah Drive at Lemay Avenue have been added to the
drawings.
Number: 36 Created: 11 /5/2004
[11/5/04] Wouldn't a pedestrian connection be worth looking into between lots 1 and 32 to
tie the internal development to the sidewalk on Lemay Avenue? It would appear to allow a
more direct connection for many in the neighborhood to get to Fossil Creek Community Park
who would otherwise have to back track along the public street network.
Response It is our understanding that this comment is a request only. We respectfully
decline.
Number: 37 Created: 11 /5/2004
[11/5/04] A letter of intent is required from SFCSD with their existing easement within the
proposed platted boundary.
Response: This property has been annexed into the SFCSD. The annexation resolution
includes a commitment for service to the development. The easement in question is located
entirely within the floodplain boundary of Stanton Creek which will not be disturbed with the
development. Conditions of the land and environment will not be changed with this
development and no crossings or encroachments are included. If the review by SFCSD
indicates a need for letter of intent we can accommodate their request.
Number: 38
Created: 11 /5/2004
Page 9
[11/5/04] Coordinate the intended sidewalk design for Rawah Lane as it approaches Lemay
Avenue. The utility plan does not correspond with the other plan sets in this regard. The
site plan, which shows the meandering walk and bridges, if this is the intention, I'd also like
to see the grading information to correspond with this.
Response: The sidewalk locations near Rawah Drive (now Mountain Home Drive) and
Lemay Avenue have been coordinated with the landscape architect. They are now shown
consistently between the two sets of drawings.
Number: 16 Created: 11 /5/2004
[11/5/04] The width of Rawah Lane, being 30', is perhaps not as ideal with it intersecting
onto Lemay Avenue because of Lemay's high speed and volumes. Rawah Lane should
transition to 36' from its intersection with Showline Road as this will allow 3 12, lanes to fit at
the intersection, which in turn would create more room to allow in, left out, and right out
operations for the residents.
Response: The traffic study does not indicate a need for this widened intersection.
However we are open to further discussions about widening Rawah Drive (now Mountain
Home Drive) but need to discuss how this might influence our open space requirements,
long term left turning onto Lemay, striping etc.
Number: 17 Created: 11 /5/2004
[11/5/04] At the southern boundary of the site there appears to be an existing driveway.
Who is using the driveway and are there any rights associated with its use?
Response: The southern drive was a field access road associated with the agricultural use
of the property. All such uses will be abandoned with the development and therefore the
road will also be abandoned.
Number: 18 Created: 11 /5/2004
[11/5/04] In general, it appears that there is sufficient right-of-way south of the site in order
to allow for the work along Lemay Avenue. However, we'll need to get evidence from the
property owners south of here that they are aware of their driveway configurations being
changed by the project. (The construction plans need to show the newly configured
driveways with the road improvements and grading to demonstrate that off -site easements
are not necessary.
Response: The most recent construction plans indicate the scope of work and impacts to
the neighboring driveway. We have spoken to this neighbor about our development and will
get acknowledgement of the driveway reconfiguration once we get agreement from
engineering on our plans.
Number: 19 Created: 11 /5/2004
[11/5/04] There needs to be an indication on the plans that the overhead line adjacent to
the site is to be undergrounded with the development. In addition, the work on Lemay south
of the site will cause additional sections of line to be undergrounded. Please indicate on the
construction plans where the undergrounding in proposed to begin.
Response: A note stating that the existing overhead electric lines will be placed
underground has been added to the plans for Lemay Avenue.
Page 8
Response: The existing topography for the Stanton Creek subdivision north of this property
has been added to the plans. Based on this existing topography, it appears that there is no
off -site drainage entering this property from the Stanton Creek subdivision.
Number: 33 Created: 11 /5/2004
[11/5/04] Is it the intention not show the water and sewer service lines into each lot until
after a hearing in conjunction with a final plan? My preference would be to see these now,
but would defer to FCLWD/SFCSD.
Response: The water & sewer services have been added to the drawings.
Number: 34 Created: 11 /5/2004
[11/5/04] The street design plans, including Lemay Avenue need flowline line and curve
data in order to analyze the design proposal.
Response: Line and curve tables have been added for all streets contained within the plan
set.
Number: 35 Created: 11 /5/2004
[11/5/04] The right-of-way for the internal streets being 53' applies to a local street when
drive -over curb is being used. I do not see any labeling confirming drive -over curb is
proposed, please confirm (Note that the cross section on Sheet R14 appears to imply
vertical curb. If vertical curb is desired, driveways should perhaps be shown so they are
built in conjunction with the construction of the curb and gutter.)
Response: A note pertaining to the installation of drive -over curb being desired has been
added to the "general notes" of each street plan and profile sheet. Curb types have also
been labeled in the typical section sheets on R14.
Number: 40 Created: 11 /5/2004
[11/5/041 Provide a signing and striping plan for Lemay Avenue (separate from the plan and
profile).
Response: A signage and striping plan for the interim and ultimate Lemay Avenue
improvements has been added to the plan set.
Number: 41 Created: 11 /5/2004
[11/5/04] Was it indicated that the profiles on the street design were for the centerline?
Response The profiles included with the first submittal were centerline, and have been
labeled as such in the drawings.
Topic: General
Number: 13 Created: 11 /5/2004
[11/5/04] Please indicate the existing platted boundaries across Lemay on all documents in
order to ascertain how Rawah Lane lines -up with the property across the street.
Response: Tract and outlot boundary lines nave been added to Sheet OR1, Existing
Conditions.
Number: 15
Created: 11 /5/2004
Page 7
RESPONSE: We have spoken with Len Hilderbrand of Xcel Energy and addressed these
utilities in our most recent plans.
c. PSCO will also need the 9' wide utility easements extended across Tract D between
Lots 17 & 18, at curve C53, and Lots 21 & 22, at curve C64.
RESPONSE: The plat has been revised to solve this issue.
Number: 12 Created: 11 /4/2004
[11/4/04] Doug Martine of the Light & Power Department has provided Landscape Plans
showing the planned streetlights for this project. The streetlights should be shown on the
Landscape Plans and street tree locations should be adjusted so that they provide a 40'
minimum clearance between streetlights and shade trees or a 15' minimum clearance
between lights and ornamental trees. Please contact Doug, at (970)224-6152, if there are
questions regarding Light & Power's comments.
RESPONSE: Street lights as shown on the Light and Power Department redlines have
been added to the Site and Landscape Plans. The landscape plans have been revised to
remove street trees from within the required 40' clearance requirement and ornamental
trees from within the 15' clearance requirement.
Number: 53 Created: 11 /9/2004
(11/9/04] Dennis Greenwalt of Comcast Cable offered the following comments:
a. Comcast Cable will require rear lot utility easements on Lots 52 and 53. We will also
require a side lot easement on Lot 51.
b. Lots 20 & 21 will require continuous rear lot utility easements. Also, Lot 19 will require
a side lot easement.
C. Lots 43 & 44 will require rear lot utility easements. Lot 45 will require a side lot utility
easement.
d. Comcast Cable would also like Tracts C & D to be utility easements.
e. Comcast Cable would like to ask the developer for an electronic copy of the Final Plat
map after it is recorded.
Response Easements have been added to the plat the desired locations. Tracts C &D are
listed on Sht 1 of 2 as utility easement.
Department: Engineering Issue Contact: Marc Virata
Topic: Construction Plan
Number: 32 Created: 11 /5/2004
[11 /5/04] Existing grading needs to be shown surrounding the property to see how
everything ties in. With the information currently being shown, a swale is created along the
southern boundary that appears to remain all on -site, but with Stanton Creek to the north,
I'm concerned that drainage, grading, construction, and/or slope easements will be needed.
Page 6
[11/5/04] Lot 13, close as it is to at least 1/2 acre in size, must be enlarged slightly for it to
meet the LUC requirement in the Urban Estate District. Either side lot line could be shifted a
little to accommodate this.
RESPONSE: The lots are all now in compliance with the minimum lot size.
Number: 49 Created: 11 /8/2004
[11/8/04] Section 4.1(D)(2)(a) of the LUC requires that the minimum lot width be 100' in the
Urban Estate District. It appears that Lots 6, 17, 22, and 23 may not satisfy this requirement. hG
Number:67 Created:11/17/2004
[11/17/04] J.R. Wilson of Technical Services offered the following comments:
a. The outside boundary and legal description do close.
RESPONSE: Acknowledgec
b. The South Fort Collins Sanitation District easement across Tract D needs to be
locatable.
Response: Distances and bearings to and along the easement CL have been added to the plat.
c. There is a problem with text size to pen width on the street bearings. See the "Ws" and
degrees, minutes, seconds symbols are not distinct.
RESPONSE: The text size and pen widths have been revised.
d. The street name Rawah Drive is too close to Rawahs Court. It needs to be changed.
Response: We will have substituted Rawah Drive with Mountain Home Drive
Number: 68 Created: 11 /17/2004
[11/17/04] A copy of the comment letter received from Terry Farrill of the Fort Collins -
Loveland Water District / South Fort Collins Sanitation District is attached to this
comment letter.
RESPONSE: Acknowledgec
Topic: Utility Plan
Number: 8 Created: 11 /4/2004
[11/4/04] Len Hilderbrand of Xcel Energy (Public Service Company) offered the following
comments:
a. The 9' wide utility easement around the cul-de-sac at the east end of Rawah Drive on
the subdivision plat must be continued across Tract C between Lots 49 & 50, at curve
C92, to enable installation of a proposed gas main.
RESPONSE: The plat has been revised to solve this issue.
b. Public Service Company (PSCO) has existing I.P. and P.M. gas main distribution in
south Lemay Avenue. PSCO also has a existing 4" ped. Main stubbed into the
proposed Stanton Creek Drive.
Page 5
large that redevelopment should be a forgone conclusion. Based on this being a request,
and not a requirement. we respectfully decline making this connection
Number: 26 Created: 11 /5/2004
[11/5/041 The centerline and top of banks (both sides) for Stanton Creek must be shown on
the Site and Landscape Plans.
RESPONSE: The centerline and top of banks of both sides of Stanton Creek have been
shown on the site and landscape plans.
Number: 27 Created: 11 /5/2004
[11/5/04] Please show the acreage and/or square footage of each lot on the 4 enlarged Site
Plans.
RESPONSE: The square footage of all lots and tracts has been included on the site and
landscape plans.
Number: 28 Created: 11 /5/2004
[11/5/04] The widths of the street rights -of -way, streets, parkways, and sidewalks must be
shown on the 4 enlarged Site Plans.
RESPONSE: The widths of the street rights -of -way, streets, parkways and sidewalks have
been shown on the 4 enlarged site plans.
Number: 29 Created: 11 /5/2004
[11/5/04] The Director of Planning signature block must be added to the Site Plan cover
sheet. Please see the example attached to this comment letter.
RESPONSE The Director of Planning signature block has been added to the Site Plan
cover sheet.
Number: 30 Created: 11 /5/2004
[11/5/04] The number of lots / dwelling units must be added to the Land Use Breakdown
table on the Site Plan cover sheet.
RESPONSE: The number of lots/dwelling units has been added to the Land Use
Breakdown table on the Site Plan cover sheet.
Number: 31 Created: 11 /5/2004
[11/5/04] What is the Neighborhood Open Space as indicated in the Land Use Breakdown
table on the Site Plan cover sheet? Is it Tract C - Detention and portions of Tract D? Also, is
this to be useable, passive or active open space for the residents of the neighborhood?
RESPONSE The Neighborhood Open Space as indicated in the Land Use Breakdown
table on the Site Plan cover sheet includes the open space Tracts, the buffer area adjacent
to Stanton Creek and the stormwater detention areas. This area as shown in the Land Use
Breakdown table has been noted as passive open space.
Topic: Subdivision Plat
Number: 24
Created: 11 /5/2004
Page 4
[11/5/04] Phase lines should be shown on the Landscape Plans if the project is to be
phased. Otherwise, the installation of landscaping or securing with a letter of credit will apply
to issuance of any certificate of occupancy in the entire development (Planting Note #18 on
the Landscape Plan). Also, Note #18 should be revised to state, in part:
"..... installed or secured with an irrevocable letter of credit in the amount of 125% of
the estimated cost of the materials and installation of the landscaping prior to
issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy in each identified phase of development".
The last part of the above note applies only if the project is to be phased
RESPONSE: This proposed development is intended to be marketed to individual lot
buyers and multiple custom builders. It is anticipated homes will be built over 5 years with
different owners starting at different times. It is impractical to install all of the street trees at
the same time the lots are permit ready since the trees would likely be in the way of
driveways or other architectural design features as well as the problem of
maintaining/watering trees on every lot without a source of water. Other issues are also
inherent since these are Urban Estate lots intended for custom homes. We would propose
that the following language be placed on the site plan to address this comment. "Street
trees in the right-of-way areas adjacent to individual lots shall be planted by the lot owners
prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy for that lot. The developer shall secure all
of the said trees with an irrevocable letter of credit in the amount of 125% of the estimated
cost of the materials and installation of all of the trees, which security may be reduced as
trees are planted. Prior to the expiration of the warranty for the development all street trees
shall be installed by either the lot owners or the developer at which time the security shall
be released to the developer in its entirety."
Department: Current Planning Issue Contact: Ginger Dodge
Topic: Landscape Plan
Number: 4 Created: 10/26/2004
[10/26/04]Proposed street names have been reserved in the Larimer County Street Name
Inventory.
RESPONSE: Acknowledged.
Department: Current Planning Issue Contact: Steve Olt
Topic: Site Plan
Number: 25 Created: 11/5/2004
[11/5/04] Even though this development proposal is exempt from the street connection
requirement set forth in Section 3.6.3(F) of the LUC, this development plan could provide for
a future street connection to the adjacent developable or redevelopable property to the
south. It could align with Diamond Tail Drive, being within 660' of South Lemay Avenue. It is
exempt because Section 4.1(E)((1)(b) of the Urban Estate District states:
Development in this District shall be exempt from the standards contained in Section
3.6.3, Street Pattern and Connectivity Standards.
RESPONSE: This comment requests that a street connection be made to the south. The
properties to the south are part of a 4 lot development called Emerson Acres Subdivision.
The subdivision is in the City, and in the Urban Estate Zone district. Lot 1 through lot 4 are
5 03 5.01 5 03 and 3.74 acres respectfully. Although they are large lots, they are not so
Page 3
public sidewalk on the east side of South Lemay Avenue. This would provide a connection
from a large number of the lots without having to go down to the main entry to Lemay
Avenue Estates. There is a community park on Lemay Avenue just a mile to the north.
RESPONSE: After our review of the traffic report and City code provisions we have
concluded that this sidewalk connection does not necessarily enhance bicycle/pedestrian
connection and therefore we have not included it in the re -submittal
Department: Current Planning Issue Contact: Cameron Gloss
Topic: Landscape Plan
Number: 66 Created: 11/12/2004
[11/12/04] Tim Buchanan with the City's Forestry Division has identified notations that
must be made to the landscape notes found on the landscape plan and has concerns about
the appropriateness of several proposed trees. A detailed summary of his comments is
attached to this letter.
RESPONSE: Redline and written comments have been addressed on the site and
landscape plan to address the concerns of the Forestry Division.
Department: Current Planning Issue Contact: Steve Olt
Topic: Landscape Plan
Number: 11 Created: 11 /4/2004
[11/4/041 Laurie D'Audney of the City's Water Utilities, and representing the water
conservation standards, has provided a COMMENT SHEET and a General Information
sheet that are being forwarded to the applicant. Please address Laurie's comments with
plan revisions.
RESPONSE: Acknowledqed.
Number: 42 Created: 11 /5/2004
[11/5/041 Section 3.2.1(D)(3) of the LUC sets forth requirements about Minimum Species
Diversity of trees in a development plan. There are a total of 372 canopy, flowering, and
evergreen trees on the Landscape Plan for the Lemay Avenue Estates residential
development. This section of the LUC specifies maximum percentage of any one species of
tree, depending on the total number of trees on the site. With more than 60 trees total, there
cannot be more than 15% of any one species, in this case being 56 trees. The proposed
number of Green Ash, Purple Ash, and Linden trees all exceed the number allowed.
RESPONSE: Additional tree species have been added and the distribution of proposed
trees has been revised to address the requirements of the LUC.
Number: 43 Created: 11 /5/2004
[11/5/04] Please check with Tim Buchanan, the City Forester, about the Official Street
Tree Species list. The Autumn Purple Ash, and possibly the Greenspire Linden and
Cockspur Hawthorn, may not be on the approved list. Tim can be reached at (970)221-
6361.
RESPONSE: The Autumn Purple Ash has been substituted with another tree species. The
Greenspire Linden and the Cockspur Hawthorn have not been substituted.
Number: 44
Created: 11 /5/2004
Page 2
Design Team Responses to Comments
for
LEMAY AVENUE ESTATES, PROJECT DEVELOPMENT PLAN (PDP)
February 2, 2005
Original Comments in Black:
Responses underlined in Red:
Department: Current Planning Issue Contact: Steve Olt
Topic: General
Number: 7 Created: 11 /4/2004
[11/4/04] Carl Jenkins of the Post Office has indicated that there is a conflict with one
proposed street name in this development. Rawahs Way already exists in Zip Code 80526
and Rawah Drive is too close or too similar in name.
Response: We will have substituted Rawah Drive with Mountain Home Drive
Number: 9 Created: 11 /4/2004
[11/4/04] Craig Foreman of the City Parks Planning Department has indicated that the
City trail will be located just north of this development on the west side of Stanton Creek.
From Woods Landing Drive, between Lots 21 & 22, the City should have a 5' wide sidewalk
to the north property line for a trail connection in Tract D.
RESPONSE: The plan has been revised to show a proposed trail connection to the north
Drooertv line for a future trail connection.
Number: 10 Created: 11 /4/2004
[11/4/04] Rick Lee of the Building Department has indicated that he has no Uniform
Building Code concerns with this development proposal as submitted.
RESPONSE: Acknowledoed.
Number: 45 Created: 11 /8/2004
[11/8/041 On the second page of the Statement of Planning Objectives, item (vii), there is a
statement that says "A 100-foot buffer is planned from the top of bank of the creek". If the
scale on the Context Diagram is correct (1" = 100'-0") then there is only 58' to 80' of
separation between the back of the proposed lots in the Lemay Avenue Estates
development and the centerline of Stanton Creek, let alone the westerly top of bank of the
creek.
RESPONSE: The scale of the context diagram has been corrected to 1" = 200'-0". The
proposed setback to Stanton Creek has been modified and has been summarized on the
cover sheet/overall site olan.
Number: 50 Created: 11 /9/2004
[11/9/04] A sidewalk should be provided between Lots 1 & 32, to the northwest corner of
the development, to provide a bicycle / pedestrian connection from the development to the
Page 1